By Andrew Villegas
KHN Staff Writer
Provided by Kaiser Health News
Michael Needham
Almost since the moment the health overhaul became law, its Republican opponents have called for its repeal – some GOP lawmakers have even advanced legislation to achieve this end.
As part of the run up to the November elections, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank, has established an “action arm” to push for repeal. Much of the focus involves tapping into what it perceives is significant grassroots backing. The group has enlisted the help of 74 conservative organizations to talk to lawmakers. The effort, which is being led by Michael Needham, also has a form letter available on its website for voters to send to their representatives in Congress. The ultimate goal is to have lawmakers vote up or down on repealing the health reform law. With 170 Republican signatures currently on a discharge petition to bring a repeal bill to the House floor – 218 is the necessary number – Heritage Action is now eyeing Democrats who voted against passage of the health law. And, despite the long odds against repealing the law anytime soon, Needham says the prospects of success are good, even if it takes another four years and a new Congress.
He recently spoke with Kaiser Health News’ Andrew Villegas on the details of Heritage Action’s strategy.
Q: What are the prospects for repealing the health overhaul law?
A: First of all it’s going to be a multiyear effort. Obviously it’s going to be difficult to get Obamacare repealed as long as President Obama would have the ability to veto any repeal legislation. It’s important remember that in 1988 the Senate overwhelming passed the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act and then repealed it one year later because Americans, especially American seniors, saw the costs that program had and saw that the benefits were underwhelming based on what they were promised. And so in 1989 we had a repeal effort of a major piece of health care legislation that passed with I believe 77 senators voting in favor of it, so there is a precedent for repealing these types of bills.
Q: Do you think that the path forward gets muddy if Republicans don’t take a lot of seats in November?
A: No. Look, I think that at the end of the day, the American people are speaking with a loud voice. Fifty-eight percent of Americans consistently in poll after poll are saying that they support repeal of Obamacare, and so I think on some level the will of the American people is going to be heard. … Our discharge petition has [170] Republicans that have signed it. No Democrats have signed it yet. So clearly, the Republican Party is more in tune with the American people right now on this issue than the Democratic Party, which seems to be avoiding the conversation. But it needs to be a bipartisan effort. … I don’t think anybody predicts that the Republicans are going to be able to get closure on a repeal in the Senate next year without Democrats.
Q: How do you expect the repeal process to unfold? What are some of the steps involved?
A: I think there are a number of Democrats who are strongly against Obamacare. When you look at Mike McIntyre down in North Carolina, when you look at a guy like Bobby Bright [of Alabama] or Walt Minnick [of Idaho], Heath Shuler [of North Carolina]. There are a number of Democrats who understand that the costs of Obamacare – what it does in terms of debt that we’re going to pass on to our children and our grandchildren; what it does in terms of getting in the way of the doctor-patient relationship – is the wrong path for the American people. And many of them voted against Obamacare and some of them have even said since then that they favor starting over with a clean slate. So [what has to happen] is for some of these Democrats … to take that next step.
Q: A lot of people are viewing repeal talk as largely symbolic with an eye toward the future. Do you think it’s a symbolic gesture?
A: No, I think this is a 100 percent authentic effort to repeal Obamacare because we’re seeing the impact. … Grand slams happen in the course of a baseball season, and this is something that I think is going to happen.
Q: What do you think are good Republican ideas to replace Democrats’ health reforms?
A: The American health care system is set by a peculiarity in the tax code … where there’s different tax treatments for employer-based health insurance purchases than there is for [plans bought] on the open market or the individual market. I think … having tax reforms that treat all health care purchases equally so people aren’t penalized for leaving their job or losing their job or from being independent contractors … is absolutely critical to creating a true market where the forces bring down costs and improve the quality of every other [insurance] product. I think being able to buy health insurance across state lines [and] freeing state governments to experiment with Medicaid within certain bounds such as they were allowed to experiment with welfare reform in 1996 – these are all sorts of ideas that various Republicans have talked about …, but more importantly, that conservative, free-market health care economists have been promoting – are the right direction for our country.
Q: In your opinion, are any parts of the health law salvageable?
A: I think at the end of the day it’s pretty clear. … The costs are going to go up. It’s going to put huge costs on small businesses. The overwhelming majority of the stuff in the bill is going to be harmful to the system and the best way [forward] is to repeal the whole thing and then we can sit down and move on. But I don’t see any value in taking the current bill that was rammed through Congress and splicing and dicing that one because the American people want it repealed and that’s what should happen before we talk about where to go from there.
This article was reprinted from kaiserhealthnews.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
Any time someone feels that the whole package needs to be scrapped, with nothing worth salvaging, it is a dangerously biased opinion that has no merit.
@McGillGrad
You must feel very lonely in your views.
I am disappointed that nothing was mentioned about the very crucial intermediate step on the way to the full repeal of this bill: that when republicans take over the house and senate they will have the ability to not fund the bill (which would slow or even hault the damage). If the American people understand this connection it seems much more likely that they will support and strengthen republican take-over of congress this November.
His answer to the “what would Republicans do?” question was basically “nothing.” He just wants to maintain the status quo, and I think Republicans have made it very clear that they’re opposed to any sort of healthcare reform.
The idea that Republicans want to repeal this bill because it’ll lower costs and not that their corporate backers are telling them to is just ridiculous. Republicans are notorious for spending. If they really want to lower costs maybe they’ll rethink the U.S government spending more on defense than every other country in the world combined. Maybe then we’ll stop spending ridiculous amounts of money funding F-22 Raptor projects that never even see combat and spend more money improving the lives of our citizens.
@What?
“Republicans are notorious for spending.”?
Lol! You must live in a different dimension if you believe republicans, and not democrats, are the ones who are notorious for spending! Where have you been since Nov. 2008? Yeah, conservatives were very unhappy with the level of spending that took place when Bush and the republicans were in charge because a very important conservative principle is shrinking the size of government (which is why Bush lost his base and his popularity tanked, he was too fiscally liberal!). That level of spending pales in comparison to that of Obama and the democrats since they’ve been in charge. On average when Republicans held full control of congress and Bush was president (from 2001 through 2006) $468 billion per year on average was added to the US national debt. This is way too much, but since democrats took control of congress in 2006 and then Obama was elected in 2008, $1170 billion per year on average was added to the US national debt. Here’s the breakdown adding to the US national debt since 2001:
2001: $144.5 billion
2002: $409.5 billion
2003: $589.0 billion
2004: $605.0 billion
2005: $523.0 billion
2006: $536.5 billion
-Democrats takeover both chambers of congress
2007: $459.5 billion
2008: $962.2 billion
-Obama wins the presidency, democrats maintain control over congress
2009: $1785.6 billion
2010: $1471.0 billion (thus far)
Obama’s first stimulus bill cost more than the war in Iraq. The worst part is that we have nothing to show for all this spending! Jobs saved or created? You gotta be kidding me, nobody’s falling for that one! What happened to the summer of recovery? Oh, by the way, aren’t we still fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan under Obama??? What change???
It must be so sad for you to know that there is such widespread support for the party of Hell No!!! versus the party of spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend spend
It wasn’t just Bush, don’t pretend like he was an oddball in all this. (By the way, where were the tea-partiers when Bush was expanding the government and spending like a maniac? Oh right, the tea party’s corporate backers were happy with Bush). Remember Reagan and Bush Sr.? Our level of spending right now is far below what it was during the last time we had a recession this bad. The difference is that Republicans spend money for NO GOOD REASON, Democrats HAVE to spend money to get us out of recessions Republicans create. Go look up how much money democrats had to spend during the New Deal to get us out of the Great Depression. Was our country destroyed (like everyone back then said it would)? No. Was it necessary because of all the crap people like Hoover did? Yes.
Obama said he would remain in Afghanistan, so that’s no surprise. As for Iraq, combat operations ended didn’t they? As for jobs, take a look at this graph: http://blog.markcz.com/obama-racine-midterm-election-warmup/bush-obama-job-growth.jpg
This is what bothers me about the Republicans, they create messes (Iraq, Afghanistan, recessions, housing market crashes) then they expect Democrats to come and clean up the mess without spending any money. Are the Democrats perfect? God no. Most people vote for them because they have a good record of at least cleaning up the mess Republicans leave behind without creating a new mess.
@Yes we can repeal
Looks like the annual deficit increased by a factor of 6.68 under Bush and a factor of 1.85 under Obama
. And need I remind you of the deficits under Reagan/Bush Sr. and the surpluses under Clinton? Furthermore, to understand why we’re running deficits in the Obama administration, I suggest you read up on Keynesian economic theory.
@Jeremy
Thank you! It astonishes me that people think you can create a recession like the one we’re in right now, and then get out of it without spending money. The current Republican approach towards dealing with the recession is basically what Hoover advocated. We all know how effective that was.
In 2000, total fed taxes comprised 21% of GDP. In 2010, total fed taxes comprised 15% of GDP, the lowest total since 1951. See http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=1950_2010&view=1&expand=&units=p&fy=fy11&chart=F0-fed&bar=1&stack=1&size=m&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s
Federal spending went up in the Great Recession–mainly due to unemployment insurance and similar stabilizers–and that is how it should be, since the private sector refused to spend. But the collapse of revenues was the big deficit creator. The US GDP is about $1.5T. If taxes had remained at the level of 2000 (i.e., 21% of GDP), the 6% increase would result in $900B more revenue and slash the deficit by more than half.
The big fiscal sin of Bush, and Reagan before him, was to put tax cuts and Starving the Beast ahead of eliminating the deficit. Between the end of WWII and the Reagan administration, federal debt as a % of GDP declined steadily. When Reagan took office, the federal debt was 32% of GDP, when he left it was 53% of GDP. When W took office, federal debt was 56% of GDP, when he left it was 83% of GDP. By contrast, when Clinton took office, fed debt was 66%; when he left it was 56%. The villains are pretty clear–Movement Conservatives who put tax cuts and Starving the Beast ahead of deficit reduction, and they want to do it again, cutting taxes for the top 1% of the population at the expense of deficit reduction–and, no, Virginia, the Reagan and Bush tax cuts plainly, simply and irrefutably did NOT generate more revenue than they lost.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
Eventually, the feds are going to have to deal with Medicare, because compared to Medicare, all other budgetary issues–the stimulus, earmarks, foreign aid–don’t matter. The Reps claim their tight-fistedness has the backing the electorate. I seriously doubt that. Everyone wants to cut someone else’s pork, not their own. To maintain a governing coalition, the Reps are going to have to keep the support their increasingly old and angry base constituency of welfare recipients (i.e., Medicare beneficiaries). But since the old welfare monopolists won’t accept cuts to their pork, the Reps, like the Dems before them, will be unable to deliver major spending cuts. The Reps lack the political will and political support to do either of the two things that can really make a difference to the debt: Cutting Medicare or raising taxes.
I find it quite sad that trolls are trying to invade every last bastion of sanity on the internet and impose their narrow-minded views upon everyone else. This is SDN. If you think you can charge in with your “American” ideologies and change what hundreds upon thousands of medical professionals know with their own first-hand experience, you are so sorely mistaken.
Frankly, this is disgraceful. I will have insurance starting next month thanks to Obamacare. I fell down when I was a teenager and hurt my back. Since I graduated college, no insurance company will take my claim and I do not have a job where the employer offers insurance. I find it abhorrent that Republicans have no plan. The ‘across state lines’ is shady and deceitful. In 1994, Republicans and their shills in the Insurance industry torpedoed healthcare reform. And hundreds of thousands have died since then, when Republicans controlled the congress and did nothing. They know their power lies in simply saying no and making the other party look ineffectual. It is disgusting, and I bet if they do succeed in repealing, we’ll be back to uncontrolled healthcare costs and thousands of people dying because they can’t get insurance in supposedly the richest country in the world.
Optomoetrists are as real as you can get!!!
I’m sickened that people like Andrew Villegas are giving corporate political hacks like Michael Needham and the rest of the teabagger GOP the time of day on a site like SDN. I love the buzzwords like “selling insurance across state lines” BS. Needham must think medical professionals here at SDN are uneducated mouthbreathers who swallow talking points without chewing. What he doesn’t tell you is that ANY health insurance can sell in ANY state. They just have to follow LOCAL mandates by legislators elected by their constituency. Why are mammograms covered in other states but not in Utah? It’s bc the rest of the states have mandates that REQUIRE a health insurance company to cover mammograms, and Utah does not. If you don’t have even state mandates, then you’ll get health insurance with literally no coverage, and by the time you find out you’re not covered, it’s too late! Republicans had Congress from 1994-2006 and the White House from 2000-2008 and did NOTHING about the healthcare crisis we have now, mainly bc they don’t think it is one. That should tell you something.
Please do not repeal the healthcare law. It means that I can now borrow my student loans directly from the federal government instead of through private banks.
Also, if I didn’t have insurance through my domestic partner’s work, it would mean I could still have insurance through my parents.
I agree it needs to be amended (I want a public option!) but please, PLEASE do not repeal it.
You people need to turn off the MSNBC and visit the real world.
I don’t own a television.
Why is SDN posting worthless stuff like this? Regardless of whether you’re for or against health care reform this article has no real information and is totally one sided. It seems to say the only option we have is to repeal the health act and then how to do it. Most of the act hasn’t even come into effect yet, what are you talking about? Why should I care if one self-proclaimed right wing organization wants to repeal the act? I already knew some people really hate Obama and anything he does, regardless of whether there’s any merit or potential merit in it. Can’t we have a real discussion about this?
Pay no attention to McGillGrad, the bitter canadian socialist non-big 3 caribbean med school grad. Do I need to go on?
This is partisan garbage, which is evident from the terminology if nothing else. I’m disappointed in SDN for publishing such low quality nonsense.
Thank you SDN for publishing this article. It’s relieving to witness that people are coming to their senses on Obamacare and Obama’s general agenda.
I spoke to my Maryland senatorial candidate regarding Obamacare and its repeal. He says that while repeal would be ideal, we have to remember that Obama is still president and at the end of the day holds the veto pen (unless the conservatives, a.k.a. congressmen from both sides who see the need for repeal, become a veto-proof super-majority). Since Obama hasn’t shown this far that he gives a feces on the American people’s POV, there’s no reason why that should change since he’s technically a lame-duck prez and he will veto the repeal. The whole process will just cost us tax-payers and will accomplish nothing.
Therefore, he and other conservative candidates are proposing that the bill be defunded, i.e. they will not approve any tax-dollars to go towards Obamacare. This will result in the bill not being carried out. Then, assuming Obama leaves office in 2012 (Oh please G-d) and a conservative prez takes his place (I’m personally hoping for Mitt Romney), they can repeal Obamacare.
Michael, it’s extreme partisans such as yourself who are bringing this country to decline. It makes me really sad, how people like you put their party before their country – way, way before their country. Have you ever spent some time on thinking how to truly fix a situation, or are you just an “amen, brother” stooge of the Dim-o-crat party, trying to protect their agenda and honor? If only you had the same passion for your country as you have for your party.
Anyone who so blatantly calls people “tea-baggers” because they disagree is guilty of true hate – the “hate” with which you try to accuse those who peacefully and civilly disagree with you. Conservatives have proposed many ways of implementing HC reform – the mainstay point being tort reform. If you really care about health-care reform in this country and what Republicans (in 2010, not in 2000) have to offer, why don’t you hear what they have to say before so violently writing them off as “hacks” and “teabaggers”?
Thanks a lot for this conversation…… This is very beneficial for me…
Finally, a conservative viewpoint published on SDN! After all the bleeding heart articles, it’s nice to see some balance on this website. To all med students who think obamacare is good: supporting this is professional suicide. This will have a profoundly negative impact on patient care and being a physician.
I have traveled the world; I have lived in Germany, Ireland, Greenland, and Kuwait to name a few. I have traveled to almost every state in the U.S. First, look at the world around you, the most socialist countries are collapsing, first Greece, now France and Ireland are on the verge of collapse. Second, for you how think that the medical care in Europe and Canada are great need to go live there first after having had the medical care here. Yes you will be in and out, it may be cheaper for minor injuries and illnesses but have something even moderately bad happen and I guarantee you will be singing a different tune. The quality is atrocious; you would be better off staying home and performing the surgery on yourself. You want a good example of Government Health Care will be like in the U.S, look at the VA hospitals, research them, you will find their not a place you would really want to go to seek medical care. That is what you are fighting to have for yourself, your children, their children, and so on. Third, do you even add in the vast size of our nation, how spread out we are, and the population; over 301,000,000 people, and that is just registered citizens not to include the illegal immigrants, unlike European countries that take maybe 6 hours to travel across and they cannot even sustain this type of government. Before you say well Canada has done it, no they have not their economy is going down faster than ours. Fourth, Reagan saved this country after Carter got done we were heading in a major recession. As Clinton goes what do you think is going to happen when you force banks to give loans to people that cannot afford to really pay them, and put money away in case of emergencies, eventually something bad is going to happen. People lose everything, when this happens to a large amount of people it affects the economy around them, and the economies around that, and so forth, this is the domino effect. By the way, do not kid yourself, no matter what type of economy you have it will go into a recession or a depression eventually. Fifth, people are lazy and complacent, you give them a reason not to work they won’t, and they sit, collect their checks without any worry of what is happening to their country. As for the “Tea-Bagger” comments grow up, at least they are peaceful, the same cannot be said for the opposition. Everyone makes mistakes it is human but to keep repeating them and refusing to see the truth especially when it is be put right in front of you is just stupidity or too much pride. Your country, your friends, and your family are worth more. You have been caught, the education system, the Media, changing definitions (just get a Webster’s Dictionary from 1975 and one from today and look up Socialism), ext. I have to give you a congratulations though, phenomenal tactical thinking, we were a few steps away from check mate. Next time don’t throw your extremist in power until you are perfectly in position for the kill shot; now you may just lose the whole game. As for the youth, you speak with passion not matter what side you are on; this is what make you so great, but your down fall is your lack of experience, and the wisdom to ask the right questions. Don’t be too empathetic to ask the real proper questions and see the truth. Unfortunately this ability only comes with age.
Contrary to popular belief Wikipedia and blog sites are not legitimate references.